"Airbus SAS is in discussions with Japan’s two biggest carriers about an order for its A350-1000, a long-range plane aimed at eroding Boeing Co. (BA)’s dominance in wide-body aircraft, three people familiar with the talks said."

It's the only model that makes financial sense as a long-haul 777-300ER replacement for both carriers.

Neither carrier has the traffic to fill a 777-9 at 9-abreast, to say nothing of 10-abreast. And with neither carrier likely going 10-abreast in long-haul Economy, the extra weight of the 777-8 is a penalty (and they certainly do not need the range nor the payload of the 777-8L).

For medium-haul and short-haul 777-300(ER) replacement, I could see them going with the 787-10. But I don't see either finding a role for the 777X.

I think that the A350-1000 is a good replacement for the 77W,minus the cabin width it will a great aircraft. But at this point its all speculation, because for many months now JAL has been in talks with Boeing for a possible 777x order. cheers

A350-1000 LHW (low-gross weight) would be great for 773 replacement at the end of the decade to go with the normal A350-1000.
Even if the 777X doesn't have similar Japanese-manfacturing content to the existing family of 777, both carriers are open to fulfill the largest aircraft segment. Still I don't think neither carrier is pressed to place an order or decision for either type yet. Waiting a couple of years will allow them to evaluate a hopefully in-revenue service A350 against a frozen design 777X.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 2):French president Hollande is scheduled to visit Japan from 6 to 8 June, is he just going to check out some flowers?

Don't think so. Cherry blossom season will be well over by then.

Quoting tkukucka (Reply 3):But at this point its all speculation, because for many months now JAL has been in talks with Boeing for a possible 777x order.

That's all speculation, though, because for many months now, JAL has been in talks with Airbus about a possible 777x order.

Regarding JAL, there have been hints that they may actually order Airbus for the first time ever for a few months now. From their chairman's comments about JAL's single-source policy being unnatural, to news reports back in March that they may buy 20 A350I'm surprised at the mention of ANA in all of this now as well.
Seems Airbus are really stepping up their efforts on cracking that market, and for a change it does look like they have a credible chance of succeeding. That in itself is the big news here (to me, anyway).

Quoting scbriml (Reply 7):My understanding is that JAL will sign for 20 A350s at Paris.

That may be too soon. From the Boeing Grants Authority To Offer 777X thread:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 213):Some quotes from the Bloomberg article*: Airbus SAS is in discussions with Japan’s two biggest carriers about an order for its A350-1000, a long-range plane aimed at eroding Boeing Co. (BA)’s dominance in wide-body aircraft, three people familiar with the talks said.Negotiations with ANA Holdings Inc. (9202) and Japan Airlines Co. (9201) are advanced, and JAL may place an order by September to replace some of its older Boeing 777s, said two of the people, who asked not to be identified because talks are continuing

* http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...rom-largest-japanese-airlines.htmlIMO JL and NH ordering the A350-1000 would be quite a blow to Boeing. Yes, the 777-9 would be a bit bigger and the 777-8 heavier than the A35J, but I bet Boeing would have both NH and JL high on their list as possible candidates for the 777X. Actually, there were reports Boeing had asked JL to be one of the launch customers for the 777X, along with BA. BA already went for the A35J...

I'm really not so sure about the business case for the 777X. EK will buy a huge number, but I doubt it will be as popular with other airlines as the 77W is. Would not be easy to recoup its development costs.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 8):IMO JL and NH ordering the A350-1000 would be quite a blow to Boeing. Yes, the 777-9 would be a bit bigger and the 777-8 heavier than the A35J, but I bet Boeing would have both NH and JL high on their list as possible candidates for the 777X.

If the 777X is the wrong plane for NH and JL, why is it a "blow" if they don't order it?

I've heard that Boeing told JL to "name their own price" for the 747-8, but JL has yet to order it. If JL would lose money on every flight, then even getting the plane for free is pointless.

If NH and JL will make more money per flight operating the A350-1000 than the 777-8 or 777-9, then it would be madness for them to buy the Boeing product, no matter how tight they have been. Especially JL, who have just emerged from bankruptcy reorganization.

Quoting carpethead (Reply 5):A350-1000 LHW (low-gross weight) would be great for 773 replacement at the end of the decade to go with the normal A350-1000.

I would not be surprised if they choose to order the 787-10 as a 777-300A replacement.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):I've heard that Boeing told JL to "name their own price" for the 747-8, but JL has yet to order it. If JL would lose money on every flight, then even getting the plane for free is pointless.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):If JL would lose money on every flight, then even getting the plane for free is pointless.

There's almost no chance of that. Obviously, the cost of the plane itself is figured into its overall profitability projections by any airline. At $350 million each (list price), it would take a long, long time to make back that investment if you're making an average of, say, $10,000 per flight and making one or two flights per day. ($10,000 is actually a pretty realistic figure.) That's why not many airlines are buying the 747-8. An airplane that saves them $100 million on initial outlay while giving a slightly better CASM (albeit balanced by slightly worse ASM) is going to let them make their money back more quickly.

But if Boeing were to actually give JAL 747-8's for free, I can't see how they'd be anything but stupid not to take them. Worst case, they could park the damn things somewhere until they figured out how to make money on them. But with no $300-$350 million to try to make back, all they'd need to do would be to charge fares that cover the ongoing operating costs. They'd be able to undercut all of their competitors and still be profitable.

Let's put it this way: if an airline can purchase an A380, put it on a route and be profitable, then there's something seriously wrong if an airline can be *given* a 747-8, put it on a similar route and not be profitable. There's no way JAL could take a free 747-8 and put it on NRT-SFO or NRT-JFK and not make money.

I seriously doubt this is what Boeing offered. Boeing's got their own business considerations, and giving away a $350 million plane is probably not compatible with those considerations. More likely that they've said they'll do whatever they have to to beat any Airbus deal, which would include various tricks (leasing the plane back, early options for future orders, discounts on future orders, etc.) to get the total costs over the lifetime of the airplane to come in lower than Airbus. The problem for JAL is that a lot of those tricks would rely on future projections that may or may not come to pass, and obviously Boeing's analysis will be biased in their favor. So even "naming their price" for the 747-8 might not really get JAL what they'd want to take the 747-8 over a competing plane.

I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 8):three people familiar with the talks said.Negotiations with ANA Holdings Inc. (9202) and Japan Airlines Co. (9201) are advanced, and JAL may place an order by September to replace some of its older Boeing 777s,

Probably you are correct, but as long as they can get a signature under a sales contract I do not think Airbus will mind the date of signing such an order.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 13):So even "naming their price" for the 747-8 might not really get JAL what they'd want to take the 747-8 over a competing plane.

And if the 777-8 and/or 777-9 cannot get NH and JL what they want to order it over the A350-1000, then is is really a "blow" to Boeing or a "failure" by Boeing to not secure a 777X order from either carrier and for Airbus to do so with a plane that does get JL and NH what they want for a price they would take?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):I've heard that Boeing told JL to "name their own price" for the 747-8

Less than 10 years ago JL was operating 76 747s (the largest operator) and it is amazing that the industry has changed that much that they no longer have a need for one 747-8...and apparently they do not have a need for an aircraft with the same seat count as the 744.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):But I don't see either finding a role for the 777X.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 8):I'm really not so sure about the business case for the 777X. EK will buy a huge number, but I doubt it will be as popular with other airlines as the 77W is. Would not be easy to recoup its development costs.

I do not think I would go that far. This is a big hit, no doubt but Boeing has to know that they are going to split this 350-406 seat market. Airlines who are comfortable with 10 abreast Y & 7 abreast J and/or have ULH or payload needs, will probably prefer the 777X. BTW, airlines with these preferences are over half of 77W sales. As this is not going to be clean sheet, recouping the developing costs should not take more than 150 frames and I suspect they will get that from just one carrier or they will not launch.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 12):Interesting. But I bet JL could make money on a 'free' plane.
[quote=Bogi,reply=0]"Airbus SAS is in discussions with Japan’s two biggest carriers about an order for its A350-1000, a long-range plane aimed at eroding Boeing Co. (BA)’s dominance in wide-body aircraft, three people familiar with the talks said."

Quoting mariner (Reply 17):I wonder why people leak stuff like this before it happens?

Well, first of all, people like to feel important and leaking private important info does that. Basic human nature and that should not be a surprise. The more cynical side of this is that this is no accident at all and they want to tell Boeing that they are really thinking about going to Airbus which will force Boeing to drop their price on the 777X even more.

Honestly, I am more surprised when potential deals do not leak before hand. There really is not much benefit to keeping it quiet other than signaling your plan to your competitors and this business is not a zero sum game like it is for Airbus and Boeing.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 18):Well, first of all, people like to feel important and leaking private important info does that. Basic human nature and that should not be a surprise.

Anonymously? Oh, well, maybe, but I've never seen the fun in that.

I assume there is some kind of agenda, but I puzzle as to what. It's easy enough for an airline - especially in this circumstance - to tell one manufacturer they'd had a great deal from the rival and will they match or better it.

Quoting mariner (Reply 17):I wonder why people leak stuff like this before it happens?

Because this:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 18): The more cynical side of this is that this is no accident at all and they want to tell Boeing that they are really thinking about going to Airbus which will force Boeing to drop their price on the 777X even more.

However, there´s no cynical side to it. It´s called "Game Theory" and it´s pretty effective if done right.

I know of one airline who didn't like the prices from one manufacturer and went to the second - but the second manufacturer (initially) showed them the door because they didn't intend to be used as a bargaining tool in order to get better prices from the first manufacturer.

I think the folk at Airbus and Boeing are very well aware when games are being played.

This is just part of sales.
Just because JL is speaking to AB it is the end of the world for BA. Not a chance. As soon as the meeting is over JL will be talking about what they have to offer.
Without any AB in the fleet the cost of starting with a new type is FAR FAR FAR more than just the acft. Start talking about mx and flight training with AB's 888,888,888 different laws on flying.

Free, are we going to be any more silly?
I am sure that if BA would give JL free B748's then AB would throw in six A380's with every A350 ordered and an additional 11,234 free A320's and the french governments tax revenues for the next twenty thousand milleniums and more.

Free aircraft is a ridiculous thought and discussion.

Every airline has dialogues with every manufacturer. And then they go back and forth.

Quoting malaysia (Reply 25):Didn't Airbus give away A300 for $1 or something to promote it to some airline?

Laker? Eastern? or Pan Am? don't remember which one.

If that were indeed the case, you'd have been talking about something that happened 40-years ago... and if that were the case, it would have appeared to have paid dividends as they have cracked the US market quite significantly. BTW, wasn't Laker, and Pan-Am picked up Eastern's fleet after the latter's demise so could only have been that option.

Quoting mariner (Reply 22):I know of one airline who didn't like the prices from one manufacturer and went to the second - but the second manufacturer (initially) showed them the door because they didn't intend to be used as a bargaining tool in order to get better prices from the first manufacturer.

"Initially" being the key word. Any salesman will tell you that all he's got to do to close a sale is get the customer on the lot. It may not always be that easy, but *nobody* is going to kick a customer off the lot, whatever the reason they're on it in the first place.

Which is why no one was discussing it seriously. We were discussing it hypothetically, and using that hypothetical discussion to prove what almost definitely is and is not actually happening.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 16):Less than 10 years ago JL was operating 76 747s (the largest operator) and it is amazing that the industry has changed that much that they no longer have a need for one 747-8...and apparently they do not have a need for an aircraft with the same seat count as the 744.

They do, they just choose not to buy one.

Both ANA and JAL are ceding market share to other airlines and to trains and they know it. They're leaving passengers at the gate (figuratively). They're doing that for a few reasons:

1) JAL is still restructuring - they just don't have unlimited funds to buy the most expensive planes right now, even if they were the best long-term option.

2) Both airlines are planning for the future, not just the present. With the population aging and the economy still not doing well (though some of Abe's cabinet's recent moves may jumpstart it), Japanese air traffic is expected to continue to shrink.

3) Both airlines are focused right now on profitability, not growth or market share. They could carry more passengers with bigger planes, but that wouldn't necessarily make them more profitable.

It's a shame, but it's just the reality of the industry there right now. It's not because there's suddenly nobody traveling in Japan, though. They could definitely fill up 748's on some routes.

I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!

There's a political dimension to this as well. The Japanese aerospace industry has been building their supplier ties to Airbus considerably over the last 10 years. There are several major component makers just here in the Nagoya area who had almost no relationship with Airbus as recently as the late 1990s.

It is beneficial for the Japanese government to consider any machinations that will result in greater overall Japanese market share in this sector of manufacturing.

If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty

Quoting aaron747 (Reply 29):The Japanese aerospace industry has been building their supplier ties to Airbus considerably over the last 10 years. There are several major component makers just here in the Nagoya area who had almost no relationship with Airbus as recently as the late 1990s.

And let's not forget many years of cooperation between RR and Japanese industry. Recall that ANA chose RR for their 787s and were about to order Trents for their 777s until British Airways jilted RR and chose GE.

Quoting mariner (Reply 19):Anonymously? Oh, well, maybe, but I've never seen the fun in that.

The sources are not anonymous to whoever they're leaking their information to, which means they'll probably be asked for more info in the future. Enough to make you feel important even if you're not mentioned by name in the reports that come out of it.

Quoting billreid (Reply 23):Without any AB in the fleet the cost of starting with a new type is FAR FAR FAR more than just the acft. Start talking about mx and flight training with AB's 888,888,888 different laws on flying.

True, but
1) If this was always the decisive factor, we should only see single-supplier fleets everywhere. It seems, though, that for the majority of airlines of JAL's/ANA's size, the advantages of having two suppliers appear to clearly outweigh the initial cost of adding a second supplier.
2) A lot of these costs would even be incurred if they went with 777X - mx certainly if the engines, wings and materials are going to be as different as Boeing claims/promises.
3) JAL were a dual-supplier carrier for a long time - they operated MDD and Boeing side-by-side.
4) OEMs will usually help airlines with the initial cost (training, etc.) to get their business.
5) Once you've spent money on establishing mx and training infrastructure to support two suppliers, you're actually much more flexible, as it's going to be much easier to choose the exact plane that you need from the offerings of two suppliers.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 33):How can a 777-9X be too big for ANa & JAL when they fly the 77W ?

...because 777-300 is carrying roughly 300 people in their configuration and they don't have enough traffic to justify putting another 50 seats into 777-9X and 777-8X may not provide enough benefits vs. A350-1000 to them?

It is time for you to accept the fact that A350-1000 will be no A340-600 and might turn out to be much, much better airplane than many on this forum, yourself included, want it to be.

[Edited 2013-05-16 04:07:08]

POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.

Quoting anfromme (Reply 32):1) If this was always the decisive factor, we should only see single-supplier fleets everywhere. It seems, though, that for the majority of airlines of JAL's/ANA's size, the advantages of having two suppliers appear to clearly outweigh the initial cost of adding a second supplier.

Not long ago the new JAL chairman stated that it was incomprehensible for an airline the size of JAL to have a single supplier strategy.

Also it was stated by Norwegian that the price reductions they got out of BOTH Airbus and Boeing FAR outweighed the additional costs of having a mixed fleet.

I don't think there was any dislike of Airbus. My personal experience has been that the Japanese are risk averse and as such sticking with Boeing was the most likely safe option, but one at a higher cost. Now the economic realities are different and as such the business needs to change.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 18):The more cynical side of this is that this is no accident at all and they want to tell Boeing that they are really thinking about going to Airbus which will force Boeing to drop their price on the 777X even more.

I agree with AR385 comments. This has happened many times. The Wall Street Journal had some years ago a very interesting article about how IB had Airbus and Boeing competed fiercely for a long-haul widebody order from IB. The A346 vs the 77W. We know how IB played them against each other and got a great deal from Airbus. It is unsual these days to see reports of potential orders that do not involve RFPs. TK, EK, AF, LH, LX, AA, DL... everybody does. Not too long ago, AM ordered up to 90 737MAX and up to 10 789s, and every single news report said that the carrier was considering also the A320NEO and the A350XWB... at some point a "private" source even leaked to the press that the order could be split. Whether AM, a loyal Boeing customer, ever though of the Airbus products seriously or not, this tactic must have gotten them a nice deal from Boeing.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 27):Both ANA and JAL are ceding market share to other airlines and to trains and they know it. They're leaving passengers at the gate (figuratively). They're doing that for a few reasons:

1) JAL is still restructuring - they just don't have unlimited funds to buy the most expensive planes right now, even if they were the best long-term option.

I thought they had turned that page. Didn't JL had a successful IPO last year after leaving judicial protection from creditors?

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 27):2) Both airlines are planning for the future, not just the present. With the population aging and the economy still not doing well (though some of Abe's cabinet's recent moves may jumpstart it), Japanese air traffic is expected to continue to shrink.

Add to that LCCs (both affiliated with them and completely unrelated ones) plus other aggressive Asian and Middle Eastern carriers that are competing with JL and NH fiercely.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 27):3) Both airlines are focused right now on profitability, not growth or market share. They could carry more passengers with bigger planes, but that wouldn't necessarily make them more profitable.

It's a shame, but it's just the reality of the industry there right now. It's not because there's suddenly nobody traveling in Japan, though. They could definitely fill up 748's on some routes.

I agree not just with your comment, but also with the strategy of these two carriers. Yield management is key to profitability. Trains and LCCs can take care of the segment of the market that is unwilling to pay higher fares. What matters is giving shareholders a good return on their investment.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 34):because 777-300 is carrying roughly 300 people in their configuration and they don't have enough traffic to justify putting another 50 seats into 777-9X and 777-8X may not provide enough benefits vs. A350-1000 to them?

It is time for you to accept the fact that A350-1000 will be no A340-600 and might turn out to be much, much better airplane than many on this forum, yourself included, want it to be.

I don't question Airbus ability to make a good airplane, but Boeing needs to stop being so complacent. Boeing is not offering these airline a new plane to replace their fleets. Boeing always suffers from "one derivative too many", the 767-400 was that. They keep talking about the 777X as its a phantom never going to get built. Get a couple launch orders from Emirates, Qatar or BA and get the program built. Boeing has too many dinosaurs around, the 747 and 767 shouls be killed off.

Quoting anfromme (Reply 32):The sources are not anonymous to whoever they're leaking their information to, which means they'll probably be asked for more info in the future. Enough to make you feel important even if you're not mentioned by name in the reports that come out of it.

One can only hope the leakers are right, because they're going to look foolish if the deal falls apart - perhaps because of their leaks.

The relationship between Japanese manufacturers and Boeing goes back a very long time. Airbus must primarily use Spain, England, France and Germany for its manufacturing while Boeing/US and Japan worked together. I understand that in Japan the 787 is seen as a Japanese invention as much as Boeing's. I do not anticipate a couple dozen A350 orders changing this fact in any dramatic way.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 34):because 777-300 is carrying roughly 300 people in their configuration and they don't have enough traffic to justify putting another 50 seats into 777-9X and 777-8X may not provide enough benefits vs. A350-1000 to them?

It is time for you to accept the fact that A350-1000 will be no A340-600 and might turn out to be much, much better airplane than many on this forum, yourself included, want it to be.

I don't question Airbus ability to make a good airplane, but Boeing needs to stop being so complacent. Boeing is not offering these airline a new plane to replace their fleets. Boeing always suffers from "one derivative too many", the 767-400 was that. They keep talking about the 777X as its a phantom never going to get built. Get a couple launch orders from Emirates, Qatar or BA and get the program built. Boeing has too many dinosaurs around, the 747 and 767 shouls be killed off.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 36):I agree with AR385 comments. This has happened many times. The Wall Street Journal had some years ago a very interesting article about how IB had Airbus and Boeing competed fiercely for a long-haul widebody order from IB. The A346 vs the 77W. We know how IB played them against each other and got a great deal from Airbus.

That article was recently linked here in another thread - I read it and to me it didn't look at all like the Airbus order was a foregone conclusion. But Iberia certainly did play both OEMs against each other quite ruthlessly.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 36):It is unsual these days to see reports of potential orders that do not involve RFPs. TK, EK, AF, LH, LX, AA, DL... everybody does. Not too long ago, AM ordered up to 90 737MAX and up to 10 789s, and every single news report said that the carrier was considering also the A320NEO and the A350XWB...

And I'm sure they did, just like BA was seriously considering the 747-8i before deciding to order the A380. As for BA, the rumour that they were - unexpectedly for a lot of people here - going for the A350-1000 also turned out to be true.
I do agree, though, that obviously all such rumours should be taken with a grain of salt unless the order is announced/finalised.

Quoting mariner (Reply 38):One can only hope the leakers are right, because they're going to look foolish if the deal falls apart - perhaps because of their leaks.

While I share the sentiment - I thought the same when the BA A350 negotiations leaked - I've so far not heard of any case where this fear actually materialised.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 39): Airbus must primarily use Spain, England, France and Germany for its manufacturing while Boeing/US and Japan worked together. I understand that in Japan the 787 is seen as a Japanese invention as much as Boeing's. I do not anticipate a couple dozen A350 orders changing this fact in any dramatic way.

The structures of Airbus' and Boeing's manufacturing being as they may, it doesn't necessarily translate into orders, never mind 100% single-supplier situations with airlines; look at how many 777s AF operates and how long it took BA to order their first Airbus, for instance - the first they got was an oddball fleet of 10 A320-100 through their takeover of Caledonian. It took BA over ten years after that to order their first A320s themselves.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 36):I thought they had turned that page. Didn't JL had a successful IPO last year after leaving judicial protection from creditors?

Restructuring was probably the wrong word to use. I did know that they were out of bankruptcy and had had an IPO. What I meant was the literal definition of restructuring, not the legal one, ie. they're still in the middle of reconfiguring their fleet and network. They've cut a ton of capacity and they don't have the cash flow they once did. They are hopefully more profitable, but they just don't have the sums of money coming in and going out that they would have had a few years ago, which would have made it easier to buy larger planes even without current profits.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 36):Trains and LCCs can take care of the segment of the market that is unwilling to pay higher fares.

Trains in Japan are not cheaper than flying. On most domestic routes, the airlines actually have to try to undercut the trains on price because the experience of taking the train beats flying and most people would rather do that. For example, you can leave from downtown Tokyo and be in downtown Osaka on the train in 2 hours and 20 minutes. That's faster than the same trip would take on a plane going from downtown to downtown, and you save the price of getting to/from the airport, which can be $30 on that route. At the same time, the trains have monster seat pitch even in the standard cars, better food options (snack carts that come through periodically plus vending machines), and on-board wi-fi. (You can also use your own pocket wi-fi or cell phone.) These are all obvious advantages in favor of trains for domestic routes.

Obviously neither ANA nor JAL can just cede the domestic market to JR, and there is still a lot of demand for flying, but they've definitely cut capacity on domestic routes, flying (somewhat) smaller planes and cutting a few flights per day on the busiest routes. I can't see how they make much money at all on these routes, given the fares they have to charge - I've got to think the only way to make money at all is to ensure that they're basically flying 100% full all the time. Flying an 85% full 747-8 HND-ITM is going to be suicide vs. flying a 100% full 777-300 on that same route, even if that means carrying fewer passengers.

I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 43):they're still in the middle of reconfiguring their fleet and network

With the last MD-90 out the door, they are done with with re-fleeting. Most of it was finished two years ago when the MD-81, 747s, and A300s all left in short-time. For now the 787 trickles in to retire the oldest 763s and start some new routes.
The next big replacement program will be the 777-200, particularly the domestic birds, from the latter half this decade but the 789 should take care of that. The only other near-to-medium term replacement consideration is the Saab 340 fleet but there is nothing in the current market in production that can replace those aircraft. The 773ERs are aged few years to oldest being 10, so nowhere near candidate for replacement when there are still gaggles of with-common 777s in JAL's fleet.

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 43): flying (somewhat) smaller planes and cutting a few flights per day on the busiest routes. I can't see how they make much money at all on these routes, given the fares they have to charge - I've got to think the only way to make money

Both JL & NH really don't operate separate weekend and weekday schedules. The same flight usually is operated with the same equipment 7 days a week. Why would they cut flights on the busiest days?

Have you ever seen the full-fare rates in Japan? Lots of businesses pay those fares for flexibility.
Both NH & JL print money on those trunk routes. It's the other routes that are so-so.